The Trump Lump: How do you feel?

[Revoltingest]

I mean, would he though? To play devil's advocate, running a business ledger is not quite as complicated as balancing our national budget.

What does "running a business ledger" mean?
Anyway, he has a great deal of business & investment experience.
It's no guarantee of success, but it's a useful foundation.
- He'd more likely understand economics than someone who never ran a business.
- He'd already have extensive management experience, & not have to learn that on the job (as did Obama).

 

[Quetzal]

What does "running a business ledger" mean?
Anyway, he has a great deal of business & investment experience.
It's no guarantee of success, but it's a useful foundation.
- He'd more likely understand economics than someone who never ran a business.
- He'd already have extensive management experience, & not have to learn that on the job (as did Obama).

For clarification, I meant: Managing a businesses finances might be equate to automatic success at managing the national budget. I see them as different beasts.

 

[Revoltingest]

For clarification, I meant: Managing a businesses finances might be equate to automatic success at managing the national budget. I see them as different beasts.

Sure, they're different.
But there is no job which provides presidential experience other than being president.
So it makes sense to prefer candidates who have other experience which would guide them, & shorten the learning curve.
In a languishing economy suffering from poor leadership, actual economic experience would be useful.
If the candidate already has experience managing complexity, it's efficient that he needn't learn that on the job.
We have no guarantee that a particular candidate will be a great prez.
This is because people & circumstances have a complex relationship.
So we should establish criteria which boost the odds of presidential success.
I look for a record of successfully managing something big & complex, either a business or a state.
This would be a minimum criterion.

 

[Augustus]

Given the fact that Obama has driven us to the highest national debt in the history of the country, a businessman like DT might be what we need right now.

A businessman whose standard m.o. involves his companies having massive quantities of debt?


There are few people I find as odious as Trump, a truly disgusting character.

His success does highlight something important though, the total inanity of most career driven politicians who are in hock to financiers and special interest groups. Focus groups and polls are more important to them than values and honour, politics is about winning rather than standing up for what you believe.

While I find him a pompous and pretty ignorant buffoon, at least he speaks his mind and won't back down and retract what he says just because it doesn't sit well with court of public opinion. The only reason he is doing so well is because he is surrounded by fake politician who live in fear of a negative headline or saying something that upsets the financiers who own them.

The US political system is rotten to the core, it is more oligarchy than democracy. It doesn't really matter who wins, the system will still be broken. There is hardly even a lesser of 2 evils to choose from.

All over the Western world people resent the consensus politics that limits political debate and stifles democracy. I disagree with almost everything Trump says, but when the system is broken anything that upsets the system is a positive.

Might be a good thing if he won, as when you elect a clown just because he isn't afraid to speak his mind, you have to see the system for what it is. Might even serve as a good example for those who think the only way to be a successful politician is to turn yourself into some kind of vapid, bland, anodyne homunculus.

Politics is run almost exclusively for the benefit of politicians, not anybody else. I live in a corrupt country where everyone knows this and the politicians don't even try to hide it, it's no different in America though. Most politicians are bought and paid for and are mostly concerned about furthering their own career/bank balance.

It's pretty funny actually seeing someone **** on their chips, just wish it wasn't Trump doing it.

 

[Quetzal]

Sure, they're different.
But there is no job which provides presidential experience other than being president.
So it makes sense to prefer candidates who have other experience which would guide them, & shorten the learning curve.
In a languishing economy suffering from poor leadership, actual economic experience would be useful.
If the candidate already has experience managing complexity, it's efficient that he needn't learn that on the job.
We have no guarantee that a particular candidate will be a great prez.
This is because people & circumstances have a complex relationship.
So we should establish criteria which boost the odds of presidential success.
I look for a record of successfully managing something big & complex, either a business or a state.
This would be a minimum criterion.

Sounds like Trump's experience would made a great adviser.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I voted number 5 because I often do not agree with him on many policies but for the ones that count I usually agree with him. He is the only person who has ran for president that actually has a chance of winning that has openly supported changing our healthcare system to a one payer system like Canada or Scotland. He has invoked the "traditional marriage" view but states he is "evolving". Seems like he doesn't really give two ****s and since its already legal we don't need someone in office who will fight for it. He hasn't unveiled his tax plans yet but I am hopeful.

He has made an *** of himself in the past as an avid anti-Obama instigator but I can vote for someone I dislike if they have policies that I like. Hopefully the reason why he has kept most of his actual plans under wraps is because he wants to promise the Republican party a pony and he wants to actually get a Mule (half donkeycrat half pony). His "something wonderful" as he stated it on his website that he wants to replace Obamacare with could be the single payer system. If it is I think I may vote for him no matter what. But that is because it is one of the most serious issues that I can think of.

Oh and lastly he seems to be fairly anti-war. He seems the kind of commander in chief that would seriously put effort into downsizing such a wasteful expenditure in our country.

 

[dust1n]

I voted number 5 because I often do not agree with him on many policies but for the ones that count I usually agree with him. He is the only person who has ran for president that actually has a chance of winning that has openly supported changing our healthcare system to a one payer system like Canada or Scotland. He has invoked the "traditional marriage" view but states he is "evolving". Seems like he doesn't really give two ****s and since its already legal we don't need someone in office who will fight for it. He hasn't unveiled his tax plans yet but I am hopeful.

He has made an *** of himself in the past as an avid anti-Obama instigator but I can vote for someone I dislike if they have policies that I like. Hopefully the reason why he has kept most of his actual plans under wraps is because he wants to promise the Republican party a pony and he wants to actually get a Mule (half donkeycrat half pony). His "something wonderful" as he stated it on his website that he wants to replace Obamacare with could be the single payer system. If it is I think I may vote for him no matter what. But that is because it is one of the most serious issues that I can think of.

Oh and lastly he seems to be fairly anti-war. He seems the kind of commander in chief that would seriously put effort into downsizing such a wasteful expenditure in our country.

Thanks for that interesting response. I may upgrade my one to a two with your argument.

 

[Awoon]

Hey guys. So, I figured I was like others, in that I'm flabbergasted by Trump's presence at all. So, I'm just really curious as to what the general RF sentiment is about this guy.

Remember, it's an anonymous poll, and your answer can be changed, but you only get one. Do what you do.

It's fun, interesting and great that only in America that a man named Donald Trump can "trump" the phony politicians running for President. He talks about America not some foreign mess called the near east. He talks about helping Americans not some phony ally in the near east. He is the right man at the right moment in history.

 

[dust1n]

More votes please. MORE VOTES PLEASE.

 

[Penumbra]

I voted the second option.

I'd never vote for him, but Santorum and Huckabee I think might be even worse options.

 

[Underhill]

To elaborate, it's been a long long time since we had a prez with a good basic understanding of economics.
Trump would likely be good for the economy......unless we spent another few trillions on needless foreign wars.

Your assuming he understands economics. I've seen no evidence of that.

 

[Thief]

That's domestic policy.
How would he handle Iran, Israel, China, etc?

He'd make an offer they couldn't refuse....

 

[esmith]

Trump has tapped into the resentment that many US Citizens feel about Washington. It amazes me to hear people say as a businessman how could he be president. Some of you elected a community organizer that had little or no experience in the real world or in politics. One does not have to know everything about everything. In business you hire the people to present you with the facts and you as a CEO of a company weight the facts and make a decision based on those facts. I would rather have a President that didn't think he knows best and to hell with Congress and the Constitution. but a President who is willing to take advice from all sides of an argument and make a decision based on the facts and his or her experience. I don't know if Trump is this type of person but the other party hasn't put forward any person that I would trust to be President. It is early in this election cycle and I really haven't heard enough (except for Hillary) to make a decision who my choice will be.
FYI, I selected choice 5 since I disagreed with all of the others. In other words none of the choices were applicable to the way I feel now.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

That's domestic policy.
How would he handle Iran, Israel, China, etc?

He'd make an offer they couldn't refuse....

^ Bombast wholly devoid of content: Trump supported by Trump-light.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

That's domestic policy.
How would he handle Iran, Israel, China, etc?

He'd make an offer they couldn't refuse....

^ Bombast wholly devoid of content: Trump supported by Trump-light.

 

[dust1n]

FYI, I selected choice 5 since I disagreed with all of the others. In other words none of the choices were applicable to the way I feel now.

Thanks! The wordings in the choices were meant to be general, while the numbers should be an indicator for the actual scale in some sense. I appreciate the vote!

 

[Revoltingest]

Your assuming he understands economics. I've seen no evidence of that.

I assume he does.
It's rather necessary to be successful in business.

 

[Penumbra]

I assume he does.
It's rather necessary to be successful in business.

He did file for corporate bankruptcy four times though, all due to over-leveraging.

 

[dust1n]

He did file for corporate bankruptcy four times though, all due to over-leveraging.

That's four more times than the US government.

 

[Revoltingest]

He did file for corporate bankruptcy four times though, all due to over-leveraging.

And yet he is ubrer-wealthy.
Failure is a great teacher....provided one eventually graduates from it.